Heroes & Villians

1. Tricksters
Tricksters are among the most entertaining characters in world mythology. Usually
male, they delight in breaking rules, boasting, and playing tricks on both humans and
gods. Most tricksters are shape changers who can take any form, though they often
appear as animals. Tricksters play a prominent role in African and Native American
mythologies. They can also be found in the myths of Europeans, Asians, Pacific
Islanders, and the Aborigines of Australia. Certain gods, demigods, and heroes from
around the world are described as having trickster qualities.
Brear Rabbit
The Coyote
Coyote is a major mythological figure for most Native American tribes, especially those
west of the Mississippi. Like real coyotes, mythological coyotes are usually notable for
their crafty intelligence, stealth, and voracious appetite. However, American Indian
coyote characters vary widely from tribe to tribe. In some Native American coyote
myths, Coyote is a revered culture hero who creates, teaches, and helps humans; in
others, he is a sort of antihero who demonstrates the dangers of negative behaviors like
greed, recklessness, and arrogance; in still others, he is a comic trickster character,
whose lack of wisdom gets him into trouble while his cleverness gets him back out. In
some Native coyote stories, he is even some sort of combination of all three at once.

2. Among the Pueblo tribes, the coyote was believed to have hunting medicine. Zuni
hunters kept stone effigies of coyotes as one of their six hunting fetishes, associating
coyotes with the west and the color blue. Coyotes are also used as clan animals in
some Native American cultures. Tribes with Coyote Clans include the Cahuilla tribe, the
Mohave, the Hopi, whose Coyote Clan is called Isngyam or Ish-wungwa, the Zuni
(whose Coyote Clan name is Suski-kwe,) and other Pueblo tribes of New Mexico. Some
tribes, such as the Pomo, also had a Coyote Dance among their tribal dance traditions.
Stories
A jealous trickster
Myths from the Micronesian islands of the western Pacific tell of Olifat, son of a human
woman and a sky god, who used cleverness, trickery, and magic to obtain the food,
drink, and women he wanted. The trickster's greed turned to jealousy and spite when he
discovered that he had a brother who had been raised in secret. Olifat caught the
brother and cut off his head, offering it to his father in place of the fish that was
expected. The sky god restored Olifat's brother to life and turned in anger to Olifat. The
trickster slyly pleaded innocence. His father had told him he had no brother. How, then,
could he have killed a brother who did not exist…?
The deceived blind men
There was a large settlement on the shore of a lake, and among its people were two
very old blind men. It was decided to remove these men to the opposite side of the lake,
where they might live in safety.
The people thought the settlement was unsafe, as the settlement was exposed to the
attack of enemies, and feared the blind men might easily be captured and killed.
So the relations of the old men got a canoe, some food, a kettle, and a bowl and started
across the lake, where they built for them a wigwam in a grove some distance from the
water. A line was stretched from the door of the wigwam to a post in the water, so that

3. they would have no difficulty in helping themselves.
The food and vessels were put into the wigwam, and after the relations of the old men
promised them that they would call often and keep them provided with everything that
was needful, they returned to their settlement.
The two old blind men now began to take care of themselves. On one day one of them
would do the cooking while the other went for water, and on the next day they would
change about in their work, so that their labors were evenly divided. As they knew just
how much food they required for each meal, the quantity prepared was equally divided,
but was eaten out of the one bowl which they had.
Here they lived in contentment for several years; but one day a Raccoon, which was
following the water's edge looking for crawfish, came to the line which had been
stretched from the lake to the wigwam. The Raccoon thought it rather curious to find a
cord where he had not before observed one, and wondered to himself, "What is this? I
think I shall follow this cord to see where it leads."
So he followed the path along which the cord was stretched until he came to the
wigwam. Approaching very cautiously, he went up to the entrance, where he saw the
two old men asleep on the ground, their heads at the door and their feet directed toward
the heap of hot coals within. The Raccoon sniffed about and soon found there was
something good to eat within the wigwam; but he decided not to enter at once for fear of
waking the old men; so he retired a short distance to hide himself and to see what they
would do.
Presently the old men awoke, and one said to the other, "My friend, I am getting hungry;
let us prepare some food." "Very well," replied his companion, "you go down to the lake
and fetch some water while I get the fire started."
The Raccoon heard this conversation, and, wishing to deceive the old man, immediately
ran to the water, untied the cord from the post, and carried it to a clump of bushes,
where he tied it. When the old man came along with his kettle to get water, he stumbled
around the brush until he found the end of the cord; then he began to dip his kettle
down upon the ground for water. Not finding any, he slowly returned and said to his
companion, "We shall surely die, because the lake is dried up and the brush is grown
where we used to get water. What shall we do?"
"That can not be," responded his companion, "for we have not been asleep long enough
for the brush to grow upon the lake bed. Let me go out to try if I can not get some
water." So taking the kettle from his friend he started off.
So soon as the first old man had returned to the wigwam, the Raccoon took the cord
back and tied it where he had found it, then waited to see the result.

4. The second old man now came along, entered the lake, and getting his kettle full of
water returned to the wigwam, saying as he entered, "My friend, you told me what was
not true. There is water enough; for here, you see, I have our kettle full." The other
could not understand this at all, and wondered what had caused the deception.
The Raccoon approached the wigwam and entered to await the cooking of the food.
When it was ready, the pieces of meat, for there were eight of them, were put into the
bowl and the old men sat down on the ground facing each other, with the bowl between
them. Each took a piece of meat, and they began to talk of various things and were
enjoying themselves.
The Raccoon now quietly removed four pieces of meat from the bowl and began to eat
them, enjoying the feast even more than the old blind men. Presently one of them
reached into the bowl to get another piece of meat, and finding that only two pieces
remained, said, "My friend, you must be very hungry to eat so rapidly; I have had but
one piece, and there are but two pieces left."
The other replied, "I have not taken them, but suspect you have eaten them yourself";
whereupon the other replied more angrily than before. Thus they argued, and the
Raccoon, desiring to have more sport, tapped each of them on the face. The old men,
each believing the other had struck him, began to fight, rolling over the floor of the
wigwam, upsetting the bowl and the kettle, and causing the fire to be scattered.
The Raccoon then took the two remaining pieces of meat and made his exit from the
wigwam, laughing ha, ha, ha, ha; whereupon the old men instantly ceased their strife,
for they now knew they had been deceived.
The Raccoon then remarked to them, "I have played a nice trick on you; you should not
find fault with each other so easily." Then the Raccoon continued his crawfish-hunting
along the lake shore.
Reynard the fox
Reynard the Fox was medieval Europe's trickster figure, a nasty but charistmatic
character who was always in trouble but always able to talk his way out of any
retribution. The Reynard stories were and are available in several languages and with
many variations. The digital text published here is a version translated to English by
William Caxton in the late 15th century. Caxton printed his translation himself on his
own printing press, one of the first in England. In editing this edition in 1889, Morley
modernized the spelling of words still in common use in his day, but did not attempt to
modernize the style of the text. The result is a readable text that has all the flavor of the
original.

5. The Reynard legend has been written many times over the centuries, and almost
always illustrated. The fox’s name varies between Reynard, Renard, Renart, Reinard,
Reinecke, Reinhardus, Reynardt, and Reynaerde.
The dark knight: The Joker
Tim before you read I just wanna say that this is more psychology and
philosophy, but i really had to so everyone can understand the movie.
Of all the villains in the history of pop culture, the Joker is without doubt one of the most
enduring and iconic, sharing ranks with the likes of such immortal fiends as Darth Vader
and Hannibal Lecter. And though he has always been popular, it is Christopher Nolan
and Heath Ledger’s mesmerizing interpretation in 2008’s The Dark Knight that has
indelibly branded the character onto our consciousness forever.
But why, despite being a psychopathic, nihilistic murderer, is the character so popular
so loved. Why do we see that freakish red scar of a smile on so many t-shirts, posters
and memes even to this day, years after the film? Why do people say that The Dark
Knight is one of the few films that has you rooting for the bad guy?
To fully understand the reasons why, we have to delve as deeply as Nolan, Ledger and
writer David S. Goyer themselves did while re-envisioning the character. We have to
find and recognize that dark, hidden part of our psyche that the Joker’s words and
actions arouse, a part so deeply embedded that it took a renowned psychologist to
uncover. We have to study the psychology and philosophy of the Joker.90

6. Agent OF Chaos
“When the chips are down, these civilized people…they’ll eat each other.” The
joker
People think too much of themselves sometimes. Have you noticed? I’m not saying
that’s bad, or wrong. I’m not calling people stupid, either. It’s very understandable.
But Tim you know what im talking about…
We like to think of ourselves as noble, honest, and good, especially in comparison to
other people. We like to believe we’d never hurt someone, or cause any damage of any
kind. Psychologists tell us of what’s called “illusory superiority,” the cognitive bias in us
all that causes a person to think far too highly of their positive qualities, and far too little
of their negative ones. In their heads, they’re much better people than (let’s be honest)
they really are.
Again, this doesn’t make us bad or wrong. It’s just something our minds need to do in
order to get through the day.
During the English Civil War of the 1600s, a guy named Thomas Hobbes was a bit
ahead of the curve in terms of this “illusory superiority” thing, even if he never exactly
recognized it as such. He didn’t agree with most people’s idea that they’re inherently
moral and righteous. Instead, he theorized that without enforced rules, humanity would
revert right back to a brutish and immoral nightmare of a society – one chaotic, hellish
and burning. One in which you’d blow up a ferry full of innocents to stay alive.
Today, Hobbes is recognized mostly for his theories in political philosophy, whose
ideas laid virtually the entire foundation of West9ern Civilization. His most famous work
was a horrifically dense tome called Leviathan. It contains perhaps his most famous
quote of all, what amounts to his justification for the existence of government:
“…no Society; and which is worst of all, continuall feare, and danger of violent death;
And the life of man, solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and short.”
Hobbes is saying that without the structured control of government (what the Joker calls
the “schemers”), people become animals. Killers. Thieves. In the 17th-century, this was
especially influential, and was the major reason Hobbes and guys like him caught on:
government, law and order were absolutely necessary.
Basically, much of your life is what it is now because Thomas Hobbes wrote some
things down. That’s no exaggeration.
Now, if this was Ethics 102, Hobbes and the Joker would be sitting right next to one
another, passing notes and giggling. They agree with one another on one thing: when
the chips are down, “civilized” people eat each other.

7. Were we in Political Science 102, however, the Joker and Hobbes would be the guys
always getting into fights with one another. If Hobbes could somehow possess Bruce
Wayne’s technology, TDK would more or less be the same film, except that we’d have a
white-bearded Batman instead.
Hobbes supported government for fear of immoral chaos. The Joker, on the other hand,
because he’s a downright anarchist psychopath (or psychopathic anarchist), would love
nothing more than to see that happen.
It’s why he puts bombs on ferries. It’s why he murders government officials. It’s why he
tries to corrupt the one person who’s a symbol that we don’t have to be afraid of people
like him (though we really do). The Joker wants to push a whole city into the wicked
gravity of madness and anarchy.
But make no mistake: there is a method behind his madness. It annoys me that the
Joker only gets credit for being “an agent of chaos” or a raving psychotic inflicting
random cruelty. Corrupting the city (that great symbol of civilization) by bringing it down
to a primal state, devoid of any meaning or rules, is what the Joker is after. But his “non-
plan” is the work of a mastermind. It is anything but chaotic or meaningless. It is logical,
clear, and has definite purpose (no matter what Alfred may say). It just so happens to
employ an element of randomness. The end result is that the Joker becomes the
personification of a philosophical argument taken to its extreme, supporting his nihilistic
thesis with the chaos that results from his actions.
Though eventually defeated by Batman, it appears the Joker does indeed prove his
point. Harvey Dent was Gotham City’s White Knight, the walking epitome of justice,
order and nobility. But the Joker turns him into Two Face who then goes on to murder
five people, two of them cops, using a chaotic, absurdly meaningless method of flipping
a coin to determine their fates. This alone symbolizes the Joker’s philosophy and
mission to disrupt civilized society’s sense of “illusory superiority” and to humble it by
bringing it back down to its savage roots.
I HAD A VISION
“Do I really look like a guy with a plan?”

8. Now, let’s go in even deeper. To really understand The Dark Knight’s version of the
Joker it is necessary to examine one of his creators, Christopher Nolan.
Christopher Nolan directed Following. And Memento. There was that Inception movie
too. He started out indie and his films well-thought-out explorations of Existentialism, the
stuff of Nietzsche, Sartre, and Camus.
Existentialism, as I’ll explain more in a minute, asserts the total absence of rules,
morals, and codes – except the ones we make up in our heads to feel better about an
existence with no purpose whatsoever, period. A terrifying idea.
He may be more Hollywood these days, but he still slips in the heavy stuff here and
there – he certainly does so with the Joker, his most famous creation yet. He saw in the
character an opportunity to play with significant Existential material, a risky angle on a
classic villain that paid off.
At the very least, it demonstrates how a society’s core philosophies manage to bubble
up in all its various forms of pop culture. Philosophy describes ways of looking at the
world. Apparently, Nolan dug Existentialism, and it makes sense that his beliefs and
values would inform the choices he made as a director, if even unconsciously.+
A766666666666yu+
FUNNY WORLD WE LIVE IN
“I believe whatever doesn’t kill you simply makes you…stranger.”

9. There’s more to this Existentialism stuff insofar as it concerns the Joker.
It’s no wonder the quote above is really the first substantial thing you hear the Joker say
in TDK. You could say it’s his thesis and that the rest of the film becomes his way of
supporting it. With some rather extreme evidence.
Indeed, just what does the Joker believe in? What’s interesting is where the quote
comes from. It’s a one-letter twist on a phrase you’ve undoubtedly heard before. I don’t
even need to repeat it. The guy responsible for that original version was named
Friedrich Nietzsche.
Nietzsche and his boys, such as Albert Camus, Jean-Paul Sartre, and novelist Fyodor
Dostoyevsky, put forth a lot of bizarre ideas at the end of the last century. Those ideas
opposed damn near everything that came before them, and scared some people half to
death.
What had them so freaked was the apparent hopelessness of Existentialism. While
“hopeless” may be too strong a word for it, it does appear depressing. Don’t plan a date
after your Existentialism class you wouldn’t be any fun at all.
And here’s the real kicker of everything I’ve been rambling on about: Existentialism has
caught on. You notice it lately, indirectly, in such trends as secularism, skepticism, and
scientific literacy. Those blogs are everywhere. They embrace the idea of a universe
without any preordained values (as assigned by a god, say); they embrace the
opportunity to chase their own values of science and exploration. Make no question that
most people do choose what we call “good” values, but a lot of them do so with an
understanding that they chose this or that for themselves, not because anyone or
anything told them to.
People these days, whether they know it or not, base a lot of their opinions and beliefs
on Existential ideas – or at least in response to them. That’s what their unconscious
minds grew up with, whether they realized it or not. They almost can’t help it, as a lot of
the movies they’re given to watch these days rely on Existentialism as well. (If you don’t
believe me, watch Fight Club, The Matrix, Monty Python’s The Meaning of Life, Taxi
Driver, One Flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest, Groundhog Day, Apocalypse Now, and even
Toy Story.)
You hear a lot of people these days questioning “rules.” Rebelliousness and skepticism
is a rule of cool for some, ironically enough. Haughty critics in 2043 will write of the
prevalence of Existential themes throughout the films of the late 20th and early 21st
centuries.
The Joker is so popular today because he expresses Existential values and ideals in

10. such an entertaining way. And Existential just happens to be in right now, so it’s no
surprise that he caught on the way he did. That’s how pop culture works – a lot of
people, deep down, believe in what he says – at least partly. A part of them wishes they
could agree with him to a point of even rooting for him, shotgun blasts in the face and
all.
WHY SO SERIOUS?
“The only sensible way to live in this world is without rules.”
Now that we’ve reviewed what Existentialism is, here are just a couple of specific
examples of Existential principles and how TDK demonstrates them, particularly through
the Joker:
The Will to Power:
Mustache-Man wrote a lot about concepts called the “ubermensch” and “will to power.”
In Existentialism, there are no rules. So how is a person to live? If the Absurd is true
(we’ll get to that), then that’s pretty damn scary. We might not know what to do with our
lives anymore, eh, Bats?
The ubermensch is an individual who overcomes that fear, that dread, and is able to
define his own values, meaning, and purpose. He decides the course of his own life, in
no way influenced by anything outside of himself.
Batman, of course, is willing power as well, but while he sometimes struggles with this,
the Joker has dived right in. He has embraced his will to power in the world (what an
ubermensch does) and tried to assert power and change in the world around him.

11. The Joker puts Batman through challenges that force him to question what he believes
in, to teeter on breaking the “one rule” that he clings to, and that is one reason people
repeatedly watch this movie so much. We are held in suspense over what decision
Bruce Wayne will make – kill, and abandon the rules that hold his soul together…or
not?
Batman does, in fact, achieve ubermensch status himself when he turns out to be truly
incorruptible. He stands by the values and codes he honors in himself as a knight.
This is why, on some level, this film has remained (and will remain) popular for so long.
Sticking to our values, no matter what, is something we’d like to believe in. Whether it’s
Batman’s idealism or the Joker’s nihilism, TDK lets us experience both sides vicariously.
The Absurd
The Joker is all about the Absurd. Not surprising for a clown, when you think about it.
Absurdism rejects the notion that there is any value or meaning or purpose in the
universe at all. The Joker obviously agrees with this, and he says it flat out several
times. That’s scary to think though, isn’t it? That there is literally no purpose for us
being here? Most Existentialists actually enjoy this to some degree. For them, it is the
chance to define our own values for ourselves, and we can choose to be whatever kind
of a species we want to be.
What’s scary about the Joker though, and what makes him such a horrifying and
effective villain, is that not only does he fully embrace Absurdity, he just so happens to
enjoy chaos, violence, and mayhem. He’s a guy of simple taste, enjoying dynamite,
gunpowder, and gasoline. Those are the things he values. Those are the things he wills.

12. A GUY LIKE ME
“See, I’m not a monster. I’m just ahead of the curve.”
We have seen the philosophical mold in which the preexisting character of the Joker
was recast by Nolan and company. Next, I’ll explain precisely why we are so captivated
by him and why, furthermore, it is healthy for us to be (to a degree).
Carl Jung was an early 20th-century psychologist and psychotherapist, highly
influenced by Sigmund Freud. While controversy surrounds his theories today, one idea
of his has stuck around that most people regard as true: we all break bad every once in
a while.
Jung explained this phenomenon with a concept called the “Shadow.” The Shadow is
the part of a person’s psyche they refuse to acknowledge. It’s the part of you that
wishes you could beat up your boss and then steal his wallet. It’s the part of you that
wishes you could rob a bank in a clown mask, or hurl down a public street in a semi
firing off rocket launchers.
It’s the part of you that wants to abandon rules, like the Joker did.
According to Jung, a person must recognize those negative impulses to maintain mental
health. We must acknowledge the darkness within us but not identify with it. When you
don’t acknowledge the Shadow, what happens is that it breaks free, takes on a life of its
won and comes back to terrorize you and shatter your “illusory superiority.”
One way we do this is through movies, comic books, and games. Famous, beloved
villains jibe with our Shadows, our primal states, and do so in an entertaining fashion
that has no undesirable consequences in real-life (so long as you keep it in the realm of
fiction). Admit it: you killed the hooker and then stole your money back in Grand Theft
Auto. We’ve all murdered a chicken in Hyrule.
The Joker is simply an outlet for the Shadow, and such a compelling one that that
millions have been captivated by him and have vicariously lived out the depravities of
their psyche’s Shadow. It is precisely because the Joker bombs and murders and
corrupts that so many viewers get a kick out of watching him. He acts in ways that we
sometimes wish we could, deep down, and we get a vicarious rush out of seeing him
indulge in such behavior, without anyone real getting hurt.
NOW WE’RE TALKING
“It’s not about money. It’s about sending a message.”

13. So there you have it. I’ve given you a brief tour of the philosophical ideas and influences
that went into the creation of the Joker, ideas that the Joker himself believes in whole-
heartedly and methodically goes about trying to bring into reality.
We’ve also seen the psychological reason why a character like this can command such
a widespread appeal and why, despite his evildoing nature, there is a part of us that is
hopelessly in love with him.
The version of the Joker that appears in The Dark Knight has become such a pop
culture icon, in part, because he represents a philosophical question that cuts to the
very heart of who and what we are. Are we moral animals? Or just animals? The idealist
in us wants to side with Batman and believe that humanity, when put to the test, will
pass with flying colors. The cynic in us wants to say “f**k people” and side with the
Joker as he lets all hell break loose.
This is why the Joker is as essential to the Batman mythos as Batman himself. The two
are locked in a perpetual yin-and-yang embrace representing numerous human
dichotomies: order and chaos, meaning and absurdity, the light and the shadow. And
just as Jung declared that acknowledging the Shadow was essential for a truly balanced
psyche, we love the Joker for reminding us of our baser natures, for humbling our loftier
fantasies with a dose of brutal reality, and for puncturing our sense of “illusory
superiority” when it gets out of hand. Ahead of the curve indeed